My "in your head for a day" -tune for the day is Monty Python's Brian 
You sure do attack Gaspode because "his lack of voting even though he voices his suspicions", while at the same time Genocide Heart does the same thing and you don't even seem to notice.Stewie wrote:What about him?olio wrote:Stewie, I'm still waiting for your take on Genocide Heart.
I'm sure there are more than one scum in this game. Or do you usually concentrate on one person at time? Why are you so sure Gaspode will be lynched today?Stewie wrote: Well damn, we can only lynchonescum each day. We could go after him, but that would be a waste of time, since there are quite a few votes on gaspode already.
Damn. Stewie is right. We can only lynch scum / day. That sentence of Aelyn's makes it hard for me to choose.Aelyn wrote:Fair dos, Mith. I guess I simply never mentioned that that sentence wasn't the only reason I felt he was scummy, simply the largest.
Ok. If you want to concentrate on one person, that is your choice. It just is scummy in my eyes letting others do the same thing you're using as a main argument to vote somebody and not even FOS'ing them. Also that kind of one-sided approach - as according to your posts you're only finding Gaspode scummy - isn't as fruitfull from the conversational point of view.Stewie wrote: 1. We can always get them tomorrow (the other scum).
2. Yeah, I like to concentrate on one person. If someone more suspicious comes along, then I'll change my vote, but I won't change it from someone equally suscious, unless they have more votes.
3. I'm not sure if he will be lynched today. Where is this implied?
Maybe I read in it too much, but you seem to imply that as there's a good and healthy bandwagon, we should finish it and discuss more/concentrate on others some other day. I know it's day 1, but still.Stewie wrote: We could go after him, but that would be a waste of time, since there are quite a few votes on gaspode already.
If I accuse you of not voting and you vote after that, does it nullify the reason behind my accusation? To make it crystal-clear I give you a hypothetical situation:Genocide Heart wrote:olio has, repeatedly, claimed that my activity has been similar to Gaspode's because of my reluctance to vote and I am therefore suspicious. This logic is flawed, as I have voted.
You got that right. It's not the response I based my accusation on. I based it on the fact that you didn't put your money where your mouth was, not until that was noticed.Genocide Heart wrote:Would you all have been happier if Ididn'tvote after olio asked me?
Either response can be described as scummy behavior (Not voting even more so), making my response a very poor gauge of whether or not I'm worthy of suspicion.
So if Gaspode is innocent, Aelyn can't be scum either?Stewie wrote:Since Aelyn is scum if and only if Gaspode is scum, then there are two good reasons to go after Gaspode rather than going after Aelyn.
And this is based on the reasoning of Peachy who voted Aelyn?Stewie wrote: No... but if gaspode is not scum, then we have nothing on aelyn -- no reasons to believe she is scum.
....
However, if we lynch gaspode and he happens to be scum, then it's very likely that aelyn is scum too.
Coron wrote:Still wondering why we haven't lynched Aleyn yet, and also glad people are seeing what I am saying.
Eh? So you're the one saying all the important things? For me your attitude seems a bit dangerous town-wise: you imply that your logic and/or observations are the things which will save the town and you'll be the one leading the town to the victory. "Follow me, I'm right". It actually boils down to your signature: how can you lynch scum by yourself?Coron wrote:Are you saying my points mean absolutely nothing to you? If so then you are a sad sad person.
Unlike Fuldu, this made me chuckle. Must've touched something primal inside mePookyTheMagicalBear wrote:Why don't you state your LOGIC in your posts, or do you and coron form the "no logic" club?
Also, I try to view every game with fresh set of eyes, free of behavioural-pattern -burden from earlier games. Like I asked before: how can you lynch by yourself? Isn't there a whole town involved in the process?Locus Cosecant wrote:When you're too cowardly to even put the number of correct lynches you've made in your sig? You ask too much, Coron.
Did you deduct his playing style in this game entirely from that game (NYPD)?rolandofthewhite wrote:I don't think PB is scum, because I just played NYPD with him, and that's how he plays, distractedly and not really caring.
I still find no good explanation from your posts why you didn't say you had a vig-type role in your first post of day 2. If you really are a vigilante type, why couldn't you just say so and give longer explanation later? Even if you have just few minutes to type it should be enough for everyone to give out their basic role description, if they're speaking the truth.mith wrote: And of course I disagree that I am the best you have to go on. olio's posts are just insane, for instance. I question the motives of anyone that advocates pushing through a lynch before plenty of information is milked out of things.
Yep, it seemed - and still seems - to me an obvious thing to do and I did my decision and posted my posts based on lack of that basic information. On the other hand I wasn't aware that you were away, but thought you meant your normal net access being crappy.mith wrote: olio, it may seem an obvious thing to you to say "I'm a vig-type, give me more time", but given that I had only a handful of minutes and had to check on some other things as well, I think I did pretty well to type out what I did. You'll just have to decide for yourself whether I was stalling for more time to make something up (or whether someone with my experience would even need to, if I were lying).
Sure. Any suggestions?Seol wrote: This is interesting though:Wouldn't it be better to at leastolio wrote:I'm willing to be the target for mith's vig-kill. Me being a normal townie, it really isn't a loss to the town.tryto vig scum?
You know the concept "taking one for the town", don't you?Seol wrote:And if you're a townie, as you claim, wouldn't you think that vigging you is the only way to guaranteenotto do that? This looks to me like a stone-cold bluff, and an attempt to make yourself look more pro-town.
Still waiting... And mith, feel free to chime in with suggestions too. Meanwhile, I'm happy with my vote on Locus.Seol wrote:Not yet, I've been to wrapped up in the mith thing recently. I'll review the thread and see what I come up with.olio wrote:Sure. Any suggestions?Seol wrote:Wouldn't it be better to at leastolio wrote:I'm willing to be the target for mith's vig-kill. Me being a normal townie, it really isn't a loss to the town.tryto vig scum?
Well, you two seemed to have problems with me offering myself as a vig target.Seol wrote:And everyone else, this game isn't just between me and mith!olio wrote:Still waiting... And mith, feel free to chime in with suggestions too. Meanwhile, I'm happy with my vote on Locus.
So do you suggest the scum vig should kill is in group of roland, Locus, me, Gaspode and korais666?Seol wrote: OK, thoughts - in terms of today's activities, I'd agree with the observations so far that rolandofthewhite and Locus were hasty in compounding the votes once it was established therewasa need for discussion, and I'm suspicious of you for your "vig me!" gambit. However, we still have the likely suspects from yesterday - Gaspode and, from earlier in the day, korais666 (I'm not mentioning Coron as I'm comfortable with his claim, for now) - what have either of them done to justify our moving on from them? Why are they so quiet today?
You did take a look at the rules? There isn't going to be claims and counter-claims like in normal game. Do you think your interest for this game will ever rise?Aelyn wrote:Sorry I've been posting so little; without claims and counter-claims, this game has kinda lost interest for me.
That is true and when I voted, I thought he is in the same group with Aelyn. But now when I read through the day 1, I think my mind was bit clouded with GH's crap and I couldn't see the link between them, even though I was accusing GH for giving Gaspode special treatment.Mr. Flay wrote:olio, you said that GH's defense of Aelyn makes him scum, but we've also got a bunch of people thinking he's on Peachy's team. Can't be both, I assume (a 7-man mafia would be too much)... maybe he's just reading as scum to everybody.
Man, what a load of crap. Nice timing with the attack too, as you won't be answering for a while.Blackberry wrote: -- After reading back, through pages 3-6 or something along those lines. It appears Olio never commented on the vote on Gaspode who turned out to be a horseman. I find it odd that he completly ignored the matter and personally appear it to be very scummy. Olio also said "After a bit of thinking I agree with..." and changed your vote to mempuff. I personally think only scum would take a bit of thinking to reconsider their actions.
I counted only 27 roles. Did I miss something?esme wrote:I count 32 roles on the role list. Since two are omitted and 32 players, we don't have enough players for the Other Horsemen.
Man, what a load of crap. Nice timing with the attack too, as you won't be answering for a while.Blackberry wrote: -- After reading back, through pages 3-6 or something along those lines. It appears Olio never commented on the vote on Gaspode who turned out to be a horseman. I find it odd that he completly ignored the matter and personally appear it to be very scummy. Olio also said "After a bit of thinking I agree with..." and changed your vote to mempuff. I personally think only scum would take a bit of thinking to reconsider their actions.
I see this from a different point of view. I win with the town - if my death helps town to win, so be it.Mr. Flay wrote:Killing a 'confirmed' (in your own eyes) townie is no way to win a game, so this strikes me as anti-town behavior even if you're telling the truth.
I'm townie. I think it's better to kill townie than get pro-town role out in the open. I don't quite get the logic behind your double-kill likelihood. I claimed because of vig-verify -thing. How can the double-kill happen in that case I wouldn't have claimed?Mr. Flay wrote:And how does your death, as a pro-town player, help the town, if it reduces our margin by one? Worse, it means all the scum groups are free to target someone else, thus reducing the likelihood of a double-kill on you for claiming townie.
I'd rather have vig's method of killing known for the town and I'd rather test the kill on a willing townie. Like I said there won't possibility for power-role player to be chosen as a victim and most likely outing his/her role.Mr. Flay wrote:Explain please, how your death, specifically, would have confirmed the vigilante better than anyone else's.
Why aren't you asking Pooky this question too? Yes, it's the deadline.Mr. Flay wrote:Why now? What's your reasoning, just the deadline?
